Like Marc Champion, Steve Chapman argues that the ban on horse slaughterhouses has done more harm than good:
When 17 state veterinarians were polled on horse welfare, all said it’s gotten worse since the slaughter ban. According to the National Association of Counties, the number of abandoned horses has risen — just as opponents warned it would. If an owner can’t sell the horse for a decent sum and lacks the money to have it euthanized, he may leave it somewhere to meet death by starvation, disease or predators. … Rescue operations would be a more congenial answer, but they can’t do enough. They currently care for only about 6,000 horses nationwide, and most are at capacity. They couldn’t possibly accommodate the 166,000 shipped for slaughter each year. Those unwanted animals have to go somewhere.
Update from a reader who discusses a factor brought up during the Dish thread on why Americans don’t eat horse meat:
I am a small animal veterinarian who has been watching the horse slaughter debate since the US facilities were closed. One issue that people never seem to address is that fact that horses in the US are not subject to the same medication restrictions as animals raised for meat.
There are strict limitations on drugs that can be used in cattle, poultry, or small ruminants (i.e. goats) due to the fact that the drug residues in the meat end up being consumed by people. Horses exist in this strange in-between world where they are treated as companion animals while they are being used for riding, racing, etc, but then treated as meat animals when they go for slaughter. If horse slaughter advocates want to pursue re-opening US slaughter facilities, they ought to also advocate strict limitations on what medications horses can be given to protect the humans or zoo animals who eventually eat those horses- which in turn may have huge quality of life impacts on those horses treated as companions. Thanks for bringing attention to the issue!
The Dish 